[Plaintiff, Appellant]
[Defendant, Appellee] Korea Jungcheon Telephone Industry Co., Ltd. (한국중천전화산업주식회사)
[Judgment Below] Busan High Court, Judgment of June 18, 1992, Case No. 91Na3611
[Order]
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of the appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
[Reasoning]
The grounds of appeal are examined.
According to Article 20, Paragraph 1 of the collective agreement of the Defendant company, the labor union acknowledges that the company holds all personnel authority, including the hiring, dismissal, leave of absence, reassignment, transfer, promotion, and disciplinary action of employees, and according to Paragraph 2 of the same Article, all personnel matters shall follow the standards set forth in the agreement, provided that personnel matters concerning union officers shall require consultation and agreement with the union. Accordingly, a disciplinary action taken without going through such consultation and agreement shall, in principle, be void; however, this shall not apply where there exist special circumstances such as the employee or the labor union itself having waived such consultation procedure. According to the record, it is recognized that, in disciplining union officers, the Defendant company had customarily had union representatives attend the disciplinary committee and reach agreement with the company side; however, in convening the disciplinary committee in this case, despite the Defendant company having given prior notice three times, orally or in writing, to the Plaintiff personally and to the labor union, the Plaintiff and the labor union refused even to attend the disciplinary committee, such that it is recognized that the Defendant company was unable to go through the above consultation and agreement procedure due to such circumstances. If the facts are as such, the Plaintiff cannot now assert the invalidity of the disciplinary action in this case on the ground of the above procedural defect.
The court below's rejection of the Plaintiff's claim in this case, which was premised on the invalidity of the disciplinary action in this case, is justified in its conclusion, and therefore the argument is without merit.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are to be borne by the losing party. This judgment is rendered as stated in the Order by the unanimous opinion of the participating Justices.